Toro M, Leitao J, Sánchez G, Díaz L, Chaple GA, Fernández E

Language: Spanish
References: 8
Page: 1-10
PDF size: 159.81 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Many studies have been conducted about dental implants. However, the osseointegration area is a topic not commonly dealt with in the scientific literature.
Objective: Design a method to estimate the osseointegration area in the placement of dental implants.
Methods: The implant areas were estimated with implant models four times as large as real size, using known formulas for cylinder mantles, cone trunks and circles (among others). Linear relationships were applied for heights and square diameters (assimilation to model theory). Use was made of a metal calibrator, a magnifying glass and a scalimeter. The implants were divided into sectors according to their different geometric configuration. The sum of the surfaces made it possible to obtain the total implant area. The surfaces were compared with the total theoretical area of the same implants. The data were then extrapolated for all the models in keeping with their particular dimensions.
Results: The areas obtained for screw and cone implants (diameter / length in mm) were, respectively: 3.75/7 = 129 mm2; 3.75/13 = 234 mm2; 3.75/15 = 270 mm2; 4/15 = 306 mm2; 5/7 = 224 mm2 and 3.5/13 = 143 mm2; 4.3/10 = 166 mm2; 4.3/13 = 215 mm2; 4.3/16 = 265 mm2.
Conclusions: The methodology used in the study seems to be a good alternative to estimate the final osseointegration area.

REFERENCES

1. Schicho K, Kastner J, Klingesberger R, Seemann R, Enislidis G, Undt G, et al. Surface área analysis of dental implants using micro-computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007 [acceso: 06/01/2020];18(4):459-64. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17587336

2. Gupta S, Dahiya V, Shukla P. Surface topography of dental implants: A review. J Dent Implant. 2014 [acceso: 06/01/2020];4(1):66-71. Disponible en: http://www.jdionline.org/article.asp?issn=0974-6781;year=2014;volume=4;issue=1;spage=66;epage=71;aulast=Dahiya

3. Quaranta A, D'Isidoro O, Bambini F, Putignano A. Potential Bone to Implant Contact Area of Short Versus Standard Implants: An In Vitro Micro-Computed Tomography Analysis. Implant Dent. 2016 [acceso: 06/01/2020];25(1):97-102. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26544733

4. Kang SW, Lee WJ, Choi SC, Lee SS, Heo MS, Huh KH, et al. Volumetric quantification of bone-implant contact using micro-computed tomography analysis based on region-based segmentation. Imaging Sci Dent. 2015 [acceso: 06/01/2020];45(1):7-13. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4362995/pdf/isd-45-7.pdf

5. Sartoretto SC, Alves AT, Resende RF, Calasans-Maia J, Granjeiro JM, Calasans-Maia MD. Early osseointegration driven by the surface chemistry and wettability of dental implants. J Appl Oral Sci. 2015 [acceso: 06/01/2020];23(3):279-87. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4510662/pdf/1678-7757-jaos-23-3-0279.pdf

6. Hsu JT, Shen YW, Kuo CW, Wang RT, Fuh LJ, Huang HL. Impacts of 3D bone-to- implant contact and implant diameter on primary stability of dental implant. J Formos Med Assoc. 2017 [acceso: 06/01/2020];116(8):582-90. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28551316

7. Soares PB, Moura CC, Claudino M, Carvalho VF, Rocha FS, Zanetta-Barbosa D. Influence of Implant Surfaces on Osseointegration: A Histomorphometric and Implant Stability Study in Rabbits. Braz Dent J. 2015 [acceso: 06/01/2020];26(5):451-7. Disponible en: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/bdj/v26n5/1806-4760-bdj-26-05-00451.pdf

8. Sartoretto SC, Calasans-Maia JA, Costa YOD, Louro RS, Granjeiro JM, Calasans-Maia MD. Accelerated Healing Period with Hydrophilic Implant Placed in Sheep Tibia. Braz Dent J. 2017 [acceso: 06/01/2020];28(5):559-65. Disponible en: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/bdj/v28n5/1806-4760-bdj-28-05-559.pdf